Comments on: Would You Like to be 17% Better?

By: eddiethelock

eddiethelock — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:25:41 +0000

A good read on this would be “psycho-cybernetics” by maxwell maltz.
Pretty much explains what everything else is based on.

By: Hank Samuel

Hank Samuel — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 01:44:59 +0000

John
Great job on the Mills and SVB observations.It was a classic match!Your web page so well done,so so much information.Keep up the great work.

Sincerely,
HANK SAMUEL

By: John Biddle

John Biddle — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:16:31 +0000

Snookersus, thanks for stopping by. While I don’t watch as much snooker as I do pool, I would agree that the top snooker players I’ve seen have a more rigid approach to a preshot routine than pool players do. They seem as a group to have more uniformity in their fundamentals in general than top pool players do.

I would not agree that pol is easier than snooker. You didn’t say that directly but it seems like you believe it. Moving the cue ball around more in pool would counterbalance the longer shots on bigger snooker tables. I’d call it a draw.

By: snookersus

snookersus — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 14:07:41 +0000

I love both pool and snooker. But the truth is in pool some of the shots are so easy they could be knocked in with the other end of the cue. Thats why you can get away with changing your pre-shot routine. Check out the top sixteen snooker players. They all have pre-shot routines and they all have pretty much identical ones. Thats because accuracy is at a premium for shot making and cueball control. Alot can be learned from them when it comes to consistancy in any cue sport that requires making balls and playing position. Yes I know they’re different games and that snooker players don’t always beat pool players, but they’ve already proven alot of this stuff pool players are trying to figure out. Check out Ronnie O’sullivans or Stephen Hendrys 147 on youtube. Its called consistancy.

By: John Biddle

John Biddle — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 23:51:19 +0000

Fast & Loose, I haven’t done a study of my own, and clearly this study was about basketball, but I do think it could easily be true.

Everything I read tells me that a consistent preshot routine is very valuable in maximizing one’s consistency, and consistency is the way to maximize achievement.

It isn’t easy to add a preshot routine, because those who don’t already have one have the habit of nt using one. Breaking habits requires concerted effort over a significant period of time. Most who talk about this advise that it takes 30 consecutive sessions of use of something to make it a habit, and that means you can’t slip into the old behavior during that time. This is far from easy, so although it seems that adding a preshot routine is an easy way to a 17% improvement, it isn’t as easy as t seems. The improvement, I believe, will be real.

By: Fast&Loose

Fast&Loose — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:43:48 +0000

This is overstated. There’s no way that just by doing a preshot routine I’ll get that much better. If it worked, everybody would do it.

By: SeriousLearner

SeriousLearner — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:32:44 +0000

Great article, and yes it does ring true for me. I think that the preshot routine is an undervalued part of the fundamentals. If you want to be any good at this game you have to develop good fundamentals and the preshot routine helps your body & mind get in a groove together and deliver the best of what you’re capable of.

Thanks for the cool site, I’ll definately be coming around.